Skip to main content

Topic: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable? (Read 6002 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • DVDdoug
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #50
Quote
There's an interesting psychological difference between how we responded to these samples. Could it be that the flaws of vinyl get under Arny's skin in such a way that he can never enjoy it, whereas I can somehow "dial it out"?

...In other words, we can place listeners into two categories: those who can (to some extent) dial out the faults of vinyl in order to enjoy the music, while others find those faults so off-putting that they simply cannot stomach listening to vinyl.
I believe that's true.   Vinyl defects bothered me back in the vinyl days, and now they bother me even more!

It seems fairly clear that audiophiles who prefer vinyl and claim it's superior (I'm not including you, Clive) are not bothered by the noise, or at least not bothered by occasional low-level noises...    

Back in the vinyl days, defects seemed to bother me more than they bothered my "casual listening" friends and acquaintances.  And, I was more bothered by the clicks on my records I was familiar with than by defects on other's records...  I knew when the tick was coming and I'd be anticipating it instead of enjoying the music.

It's also fairly clear that in those days, "audiophiles" were  bothered by vinyl defects as there was lots of interest in caring-for and preserving records.

I also remember visiting a house with a high-end stereo when I was a "kid",   They had a pair of those cylindrical Empire speakers.   The were playing an (distant?) FM radio station and the hiss from the tweeters was terrible!   (Our stereo at home probably didn't have tweeters.)   Nobody else seemed to be noticing the "poor sound quality".

But interestingly, I preferred vinyl over hissy (commercial) cassettes with rolled-off highs, and I never actually bought any cassettes, although I copied my records to cassette for listening in the car.   (8-Tracks were out of the question, since sometimes the track would change in the middle of a song.)    
  • Last Edit: 23 July, 2017, 11:05:03 AM by DVDdoug

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #51
I was going to reply to Arny's most recent response, but I see it's been moved to the recycle bin under TOS2.
Therefore I see no point in continuing the playground scrap.

That said, in preparation for my reply I had already created de-tic'd versions of the samples, so I'm providing them here in case anyone wants to ABX them.

Let me start by admitting that it was not worth the inordinate amount of time it would take to de-tic the quiet section at the beginning of the sample from the ELP laser turntable. Without a music-free noise fingerprint to use for decrackling, it would take several hours of painstaking manual editing, and even then the results would probably not be competely tic-free. So the de-tic'd samples here contain only the louder sections. But I think they are still pertinent to the point I was trying to make, which is that they are easily ABXable without the tell-tale tics. I attach my own ABX log.

  • bennetng
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #52
Without a music-free noise fingerprint to use for decrackling
Here you are. Maybe it was the studio's fault to not equipped with a semiconductor fab like cleanroom to use the ELP. We did clean the vinyls but they were not immediately dry after vacuuming, we usually put them aside for several hours so they become dry enough to put into the ELP or the Stantons (didn't heard about the wet playing trick :P ). We also digitized vintage tapes so stuff like tape particles and mold could contaminate the cleaned vinyls again.

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #53
I created de-tic'd versions of the samples, so I'm providing them here in case anyone wants to ABX them.

Let me start by admitting that it was not worth the inordinate amount of time it would take to de-tic the quiet section at the beginning of the sample from the ELP laser turntable. Without a music-free noise fingerprint to use for decrackling, it would take several hours of painstaking manual editing, and even then the results would probably not be competely tic-free. So the de-tic'd samples here contain only the louder sections. But I think they are still pertinent to the point I was trying to make, which is that they are easily ABXable without the tell-tale tics. I attach my own ABX log.

First, please note the attachment showing potentially audible differences in the normal audible range, varying up to several dB   between the Laser1 and needle1 files, named accordingly. R and G relate to the red lines and the green lines, respectively, with red being the needle1 file and green being the laser1 file.

Second, please note the corresponding ABX log whose name also indicates the range of times  that I (sucessfully) ABXed. 

My subjective opinion is that the differences in the timbre of the cymbal crash was a pretty obvious "tell".
  • Last Edit: 25 July, 2017, 08:17:55 AM by Arnold B. Krueger

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #54
Without a music-free noise fingerprint to use for decrackling
Here you are. Maybe it was the studio's fault to not equipped with a semiconductor fab like cleanroom to use the ELP. We did clean the vinyls but they were not immediately dry after vacuuming, we usually put them aside for several hours so they become dry enough to put into the ELP or the Stantons (didn't heard about the wet playing trick :P ). We also digitized vintage tapes so stuff like tape particles and mold could contaminate the cleaned vinyls again.

Thanks again.

Please see the attachment showing unexpectedly high measured averaged  levels for the subjectively quieter "needle new"   file as opposed to the measured lower values for the ELP file..

  • bennetng
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #55
Please see the attachment showing unexpectedly high measured averaged  levels for the subjectively quieter "needle new"  file as opposed to the measured lower values for the ELP file..
As mentioned in my previous post, the files are not meant to be ABXed. People who want to do so feel free to make any adjustment they like to the files.

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #56
Thanks, Arny, for taking the trouble to do an ABX of the two files.

First, please note the attachment showing potentially audible differences in the normal audible range, varying up to several dB  between the Laser1 and needle1 files, named accordingly. R and G relate to the red lines and the green lines, respectively, with red being the needle1 file and green being the laser1 file.
I also did a frequency analysis, because I was suspicious that what sounded like increased clarity in the laser sample might very well be due to a simple difference in frequency balance. Initially it looked like the only significant difference was above about 13kHz (which I thought could not really explain what I was hearing), but on more careful inspection I think the laser sample has more energy in the presence region (3kHz - 12kHz) by a couple of dB, so I am content to believe that this is probably the dominant factor in the audible difference.

Second, please note the corresponding ABX log whose name also indicates the range of times  that I (sucessfully) ABXed.
Although the stats show you were able to distinguish the two samples, I have to say I'm surprised that there were 2 negatives amongst the trials. I had no negatives at all, and was able to make a decision on each trial within a couple of seconds.

I know you've explained that your hearing has been compromised by recent medical treatments, so perhaps that's a possible explanation.

My subjective opinion is that the differences in the timbre of the cymbal crash was a pretty obvious "tell".
Agreed.

In summary, do you agree that there are audible differences between the two samples that are not solely due to the increased tics and pops from the laser turntable?

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #57
In summary, do you agree that there are audible differences between the two samples that are not solely due to the increased tics and pops from the laser turntable?

It seems that the audible difference may have been due to artifacts of the process that removed the tics. The tics utterly masked my ability to tell much more than that there were way to many tics to tell much of anything. With tics in place, both samples were utterly unenjoyable, one more so than the other.

Both samples  with tics managed, were subjectively tic-free enough to be listened to with some amount of pleasure. Subtle technical differences aside, I could listen to the music and enjoy the musical art that they embodied.

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #58
Please see the attachment showing unexpectedly high measured averaged  levels for the subjectively quieter "needle new"  file as opposed to the measured lower values for the ELP file..
As mentioned in my previous post, the files are not meant to be ABXed. People who want to do so feel free to make any adjustment they like to the files.

That said, I find it curious that the averaged SNR of the ELP file was that much bette despite all the transient noiser.

AFIK they were well-matched insofar as the level of the music goes.

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #59
In summary, do you agree that there are audible differences between the two samples that are not solely due to the increased tics and pops from the laser turntable?
It seems that the audible difference may have been due to artifacts of the process that removed the tics.
You don't know what the process was, so you're making suppositions without any supporting evidence.
I'll give you a hint: the process didn't touch the cymbal crashes, which you've already stated was an obvious "tell" between the two samples.

For your further amusement, I've attached short extracts that include one of the "tell-tale" cymbal crashes.
Both are from the laser turntable: one is the original sample, the other is the de-tic'd version.
If, as you suggest, the audible difference is an artefact of the tic-removal process, you'll be able to ABX them easily. I challenge you to do that.

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #60
In summary, do you agree that there are audible differences between the two samples that are not solely due to the increased tics and pops from the laser turntable?
It seems that the audible difference may have been due to artifacts of the process that removed the tics.
You don't know what the process was,

That makes what followed a blind test. ;-)

Quote
so you're making suppositions without any supporting evidence.

Utterly false.  May even speak to state of mind...

I provided the frequency response and noise level curves. 

You might not like the evidence, you may disagree with the evidence, but claiming it does  not exist is utterly false.

Furthermore, the evidence about background noise levels may support some of your hypotheses.

Quote
I'll give you a hint: the process didn't touch the cymbal crashes, which you've already stated was an obvious "tell" between the two samples.

So, you say.

Quote
For your further amusement, I've attached short extracts that include one of the "tell-tale" cymbal crashes.
Both are from the laser turntable: one is the original sample, the other is the de-tic'd version.
If, as you suggest, the audible difference is an artefact of the tic-removal process, you'll be able to ABX them easily. I challenge you to do that.

We shall see. Unlike you, I just analyze and test the evidence.

For you there seems to be this non-technical foregone conclusion stated in Placebophile terms.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #61
Dunning KruEger strikes again.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #62
We shall see. Unlike you, I just analyze and test the evidence.
Oops. I have just discovered that I made an error.  :-[
I am man enough to admit it.
But before I reveal my mistake, let's see if the guy who likes to analyse and test the evidence can discover what it is.

Honestly, I didn't do this on purpose as bait, but what the heck - may as well see what transpires.

Re: How many plays before a record shows enough deterioration to be noticeable?
Reply #63
We shall see. Unlike you, I just analyze and test the evidence.
Oops. I have just discovered that I made an error.  :-[
I am man enough to admit it.
But before I reveal my mistake, let's see if the guy who likes to analyse and test the evidence can discover what it is.

Honestly, I didn't do this on purpose as bait, but what the heck - may as well see what transpires.


Failure to find a particular mistake in the  midst of many mistakes is not a big deal. The big fault is that the sample is so short as to be easily criticized for "cherry-picking".  It is pretty trivial to find media that makes a point, particularly if the point is "Can't hear a difference".